click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130101
20130131
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
of solar power, for example. something similar to moore's law applying to solar panels. >> it's not actually fully moore's law, there's also sort of the china law which is china overproduces to the point of bankruptcy. [laughter] which is sort of why the panels are so low. but it's close. >> but do you see technology as transforming our energy situation? >> it is. and i think although it's controversial, the fact of the matter is we should give credit to the people who invented these new forms of oil and natural gas drilling generally known as fracking, hydraulic fracking and so forth. those are american technological successes that have enabled us to sort of find more of this stuff. and, again, we can decide -- we can have a separate discussion as to how to regulate them and so forth which is very controversial. but the fact of the matter is that has materially changed the economic structure of energy in america. if you take a look at conservation and renewables which i think is, ultimately, the right answer, what you see now is the automation and instrumentation of passive s
of reasonableness? >> i don't believe it does, justice kennedy. i think as virginia v. moore plainly teaches, individual state laws do not effect whether or not this activity was reasonable under the constitution. >> but we have always, and correct me if i'm wrong, i think that we have always thought of fourth amendment reasonableness standards as being a national standard. suppose 40 states, you know, we can play the game, suppose 40 states had rules, had warrants and many of them had expedited procedures. that's still irrelevant? we don't look at that at a all? >> your honor, i think this court's decision in sampson v. california is instruct i. in that particular case the court approves suspicionless searches, and i think a vast majority of states disapproved of that particular law enforcement practice. but that does not bear on the issue of whether or not that violates the fourth amendment. >> of course, we don't know why they disapproved, and i guess your point is they may well have not permitted it because they were under what you would call the mistaken belief that it was unconstitutio
, 90 come in one case 340 years. it was a stack of seconds. they gave joe moore, a hog farmer, who if i had enough, there were 60 mins, they did a great piece that shows the house joe moore, really a ramshackle hut, gave about a 90 year sentence but now, it was actually, the range was from probation to 99 years and for some reason the jury saw fit to give him nine years of grace. freddie, ma a 21 euros, son of a military man, he had gone to school, was in college, got a 25 year since. he asked his father way he should take a plea, and his father said look, if you're innocent you need to prove, get your day in court and go to trial and prove it. the son took his word, went to trial and got a 25 year sentence instead of a five year plea sends, since he would've gotten had he planned. the stories went on and on, and quickly, i probably most certainly would've done exactly if i had been in the same situation, people start to say we can get a fair trial, we are going to start to take place but to take place but i do have many of you know, but again tv makes it seem like everyone goes to tria
? my friend, steven moore, was on tv today. he's at the "wall street journal." he said, you don't have to worry about people coming in and being a public charge. there's a law against that. well, mr. moore, there may be a law against it but it's not being enforced. we need to know it's going to be enforced in the future. younger people in canada get a priority. well, pretty soon people will be on social security, medicare when they reach those ages. shouldn't we, as a rational nation, look to give priority to younger people who will work a little longer and pay more into the system before they draw these benefits? they give preferences to investors, those who create jobs and bring factories and -- and manufacturing to our country. those are the kind of things i think we ought to be talking about. this bill makes reference to guest workers in their outline. it's a very delicate issue. let me just tell you what was in last year's bill last time in 2007. and reason to my mind was one of the greater errors in the legislation. people would come into the country for three years. they could b
it with your help and i thank you for appearing here today. thank you. >> news moore? >> thank you so much. i joined so many others in ottavio who have turned your pain into some actionable plans for the current killings and violence. i just don't know that i can do it, so i really appreciate your appearing to help us sort through these things. i think part of what makes all this so helpless is because how do you prepare in this sleepy little town like newton, connecticut, anticipating that someone will come in and shoot 26 people. you just don't necessarily prepare for that as you might think of some big-city, where that might have been. but there are -- i'm talking about domestic violence now. we know that every single day there's going to be some woman who is going to be killed because there are restraining orders that are put out there and they won in his spouse a firearm is five times by likely to be killed or that we have federal laws prohibiting misdemeanor or felony -- folks of felonies from having a firearm, but what do you think? what do you think, cheese is maybe a grant program re
. they have the power to block legislation without even coming to the moore to explain themselves -- without even coming to the floor to explain themselves. in such a world, as we have seen, why would the minority come to the table to cut a deal? i showed you a list of all the legislation that they blocked the last couple of years. there wasn't any overcure from the -- overture from the minority to compromise. they just said, we're going 0 kill it. the dream act, for example. all the other bills here, the dream act and the other ones that i showed that we wanted to bring up. here, here's the list again. the dream act. well, did the republicans say, we will stomp up and down, we want to compromise? no, they just killed it. the bringing jobs home act, just kill it. the paycheck fairness act, just kill it. creating american jobs and ending offshoring act -- just kill it. notifies real attempt to compromise. they didn't have -- there was no real attempt to compromise. they didn't have to compromise. now, in contrast, under my proposal where you would have 60 votes at the beginning and if you did
tyler moore mary president john tyler while he was in office after his first wife passed away. c-span original new series, first ladies, influence and damage, public and private lives , interest, and their influence on the president, produced the white house historical association. season one begins present state of your 18th at 9:00 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> next, today's white house briefing with press secretary jay carney. he talked about check hegel's nomination to become america's next and secretary commemoration policy, and the iranian nuclear program. this is 40 minutes. >> it could be. i did not really want to let you guys today. good afternoon, ladies and summoned. welcome back to the briefing room for your daily briefing. i do not have any announcements to make at the top, so i'll go straight to darlene. >> thank you. the jobs council expired today commanded is not being renewed. can you explain why it is not be renewed? >> as you know, when the president took office created the presidential economic advisory board affectional
's >> i believe it does. as virginia frizzes -- versus moore under the constitution. >> but we have always, correct me if i'm wrong, we have always voted to reasonable standards as being in national standard. >> suppose 40 states have rules and many of them have expedited procedure. is that relevant? we don't look at that at all. >> the decision and is instructive and in that particular case the court approved and a vast majority of states disapproved that particular law enforcement practice, but that doesn't bear on the issue of whether or not that violates the fourth amendment. >> of course we don't know why they disapproved. you're point is they may well not have permitted because they were under what he would call the mistaken belief that it was under the constitution. >> i suppose that is a possibility, justice scalia to respect any issuing in the conviction rate lower than the states would the practice is to take? >> your honor, i think the national district attorneys association cited a study i know the respondent also cited a study that shows it doesn't have any bearing, but i thin
or are thinking about addressing those pressures as demand for food expands. then i want to go to dale moore, with the farm pure -- bureau now, and then frank because i know he -- went to brazil together, and we met with ranchers down in brazil including assistance farmers, and, really, looking there at how brazil is trying to manage that intersection of agriculture production on the one hand and protecting its prop call forests. glen, let me start with you. >> [inaudible] >> yeah, ag and food and, you know, how they think about that, and how people are hungry. how do you transcend that and get them food, but not rape and pillage the land? >> lynn, thank you, and congratulations to you on the council on really a spectacular event and initiative overall, and the papers are good and the program is good. thank you for bringing us together and throwing the question our way. nature conservancy, you know generally what we do. we are a global organization, and agriculture is at the top of the agenda over the last couple years. it's what we call the global priorities we are working on, and that's he
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9